Everyone keeps acting like some big revelation is going to change the game. But it’s not. From the very beginning the game was getting 37 year old federal judges, that’s all they care about and it’s happening and they’re happy.
Show this thread
-
How would you have done it then? How do you get growth insurance for more people and protect pre-existing conditions without a law similar to this one?
I’d start with a viable public option. But I’m not trying to debate healthcare policies. I’m pointing out the hubris in assuming that you can decide for other people what constitutes an improvement
-
-
They wanted a public option! Lieberman killed the public option.
-
It’s not hubris. I said the law improved people’s lives and it did. Measurably!
- 2 more replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.